1 / 23

Who Are They? National Study on the Status of Social Studies Teachers Reveals a Profile of High Frequency Technology

Who Are They? National Study on the Status of Social Studies Teachers Reveals a Profile of High Frequency Technology Users. National Council for the Social Studies CUFA Nov. 15, 2012 Gayle Y. Thieman , Joseph E. O’Brien , Phillip J. VanFossen , & Michael J. Berson.

lawson
Download Presentation

Who Are They? National Study on the Status of Social Studies Teachers Reveals a Profile of High Frequency Technology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Who Are They? National Study on the Status of Social Studies Teachers Reveals a Profile of High Frequency Technology Users National Council for the Social Studies CUFA Nov. 15, 2012 Gayle Y. Thieman, Joseph E. O’Brien, Phillip J. VanFossen, & Michael J. Berson

  2. Prelude: Teens & Technology • 95% of teens are online • Internet-using teens ages 12-17 • 37% video chat • 27% record & upload video to Internet • 13% stream video live to Internet for others to watch (Pew Internet & American Life Project, Teens & Online Behavior, 2012) • 31% of 14-17 year olds own smartphones • Median teen texters send 60 texts/day (Pew Internet & American Life Project, Teens, Smartphones & Texting, 2012)

  3. While we know what teachers should do, what is less clear is what they report doing Given the digital nature of today’s youth, “[teachers] must leverage [technology] to provide engaging and powerful learning experiences and content, as well as resources and assessments that measure student achievement in more complete, authentic, and meaningful ways” (U.S. Department of Education, 2010, p. ix)

  4. We examined data fromthe Survey on Status ofSocial Studies to ask: • What is the profile of social studies teachers who have been labeled frequent classroom users of digital/Internet technology? • How does technology used by teachers and students vary across grade levels? rhetoricalcommons.org

  5. Survey Questions 1. Describe the Internet access in your classroom 2. How often do you use technology to: • support learner- centered strategies • develop students' higher order skills and creativity • address the content standards. http://www.flickr.com/photos/masseoe/ 8167753498/lightbox

  6. 3. How often do you engage students in lessons that use: • interactive multi- media presentations • instructional strategies that utilize digital images/primary sources • digital media, e.g., digital camera, cell phone, iPod, or digital video http://www.flickr.com/photos/39298497@N03/3613170394/sizes/m/

  7. 4. How often do you have students use the Internet during your social studies instruction to: • find and examine primary source materials • collect information for reports or project • complete a Webquest or other inquiry activity • take a virtual field trip to an online museum • communicate with others (students, historians) • Communicate with students from another country • develop Web 2.0 projects (podcasts, wikis…)

  8. Methods of Analysis To determine which teachers were high-frequency users of digital technology: • created a simple scale variable by summing responses to the 16 survey items about the frequency of use of digital technology and/or the Internet (VanFossen, 1999-2000). • conducted analysis on sample of highest & lowest frequency users (n=2,138) (Note: nof total public school teachers in the survey was 10,796) • explored what differentiates high-frequency users from low-frequency users.

  9. Characteristics of High Frequency Technology Users

  10. Frequency of Use by Grade Level Primary – K-3 (n=2295) Intermediate – 4-5 (n= 1637) Middle – 6-8 (n=2892) High – 9-12 (n=3293) For some analyses combined primary & intermediate into elementary (n=3932) middle & high into secondary (n=6185)

  11. Elementary versus Secondary Teachers’ Use of Technology

  12. Students’ Use of Technology On some questions primary teachers reported less use of technology than did intermediate, middle or high school teachers.

  13. Discussion: Years of Experience Tracking data suggests that early career teachers in their 20’s have personal high tech digital profiles: Internet access, use of social networking sites, wireless connectors, and own laptop, iPod or MP3 player, game console, and smart phone (Rainie, 2011). Why are early career teachers less likely to use technology with their students?

  14. Informal learning gained from such life experiences does not readily translate into academic content and skills (Bull, et al. 2008) “Most of the [digital] tools we advocate using…are unwieldy to manage in the classroom and require a great deal of prior planning to use effectively. If it takes experienced teachers who are comfortable with the technology [four hours] to prepare a successful classroom activity, how long must it take more novice teachers?” (Talley, 2007, pp. 312-313)

  15. Discussion: Grade Level Secondary teachers were more likely than elementary teachers to report using technology to develop students’ higher order thinking skills and creativity and to use digital images, primary sources, and interactive multimedia presentations

  16. More emphasis on lower tech (Web 1.0) than higher tech (Web 2.0) • What is less certain is whether teachers’ technology use actually promotes critical thinking and how students are engaging with the technology • Few teachers report students take a virtual field trip, develop Web 2.0 projects or communicate with others

  17. Discussion: Teaching Context • High frequency users were more likely to work in high SES district than low SES district. • “Social class appears to influence teacher beliefs about the implementation of instructional uses of computers” (DeWitt, 2007, p. 300). • More opportunity for creativity and higher–order thinking skills in higher SES schools • Students in higher SES schools had more access to technology at school and at home

  18. Shift in the digital divide? Navigating academic web requires skills in searching, summarizing, & evaluating complex information. Ignoring the literacy demands of new technologies has serious consequences “Real digital divide will be less about access to technologies and more about who gets to develop human social capital to use these tools” (Talley, 2007, pp. 315-316)

  19. Fate of Web 2.0 in Social Studies—Further Research • Little use of Web 2.0 technologies. Supports work of Friedman & VanFossen (2010) & Hicks, Doolittle, & Lee (2004) • How widespread is the use of Web 1.0 technologies in relation to Web 2.0 technologies? • How are teachers using both forms of technology? • Does use of Web 1.0 technologies better enable teachers to transmit information in a more efficient & “engaging” manner, reinforcing traditional means of teaching?

  20. Implications for Teacher Preparation—Further Research • Challenges to technology integration in elementary schools • How to ensure all students, especially those in lower SES schools, use technology as a tool for learning

  21. References • Bull, G., Thompson, A., Searson, M., Garofalo, J., Park, J. Young, C. Y Lee, J. (2008). Connecting informal and formal learning: Experiences in the age of participatory media. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 8 (2), 100-107. • DeWitt, S.W. (2007). Dividing the digital divide: Instructional use of computers in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 35 (2), 277-304. • Friedman, A.M. & VanFossen, P.J. (2010). The internet in social studies classrooms: Lost opportunity or unexplored frontier? In Diem & BersonIeds), Technology in retrospect: Social Studies in the information age 1984-2009.

  22. References • Hicks, D., Doolittle, P., & Lee, J. (2004) Social studies teachers’ use of classroom-based and web-based historical primary sources. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32, (2), 213-247. • Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2012). Teens & Online Behavior, http://pewinternet.org/Presentations/2012/July/Teens-2012-Truth-Trends-and-Myths-About-Teen-Online-Behavior.aspx • Pew Internet & American Life Project, Teens, Smartphones & Texting, 2012) http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Teens-and-smartphones/Summary-of-findings.aspx

  23. References • Rainie, L. (2011). The new education ecology. Presentation at the 17th Annual Sloan Consortium.http://www.pewinternet.org/Presentations/2011/Nov/The-new-education-ecology.aspx • Talley, B. (2007). Digital Technology and the End of Social Studies Education. Theory & Research in Social Education, 35(2), 305-321. • U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Washington, D.C. • VanFossen, P.J. (1999-2000). An analysis of the use of the Internet and World Wide Web by secondary social studies teachers in Indiana. The International Journal of Social Education, 14(20), 87-109

More Related